Interference

Interference

• Some forgetting takes place because of this

• This occurs when two pieces of information disrupt each other, resulting in forgetting of one or both, or in some distortion of memory

• Mainly proposed as an explanation for forgetting in LTM

Proactive interference

• Forgetting occurs when older memories, which are already stored, disrupt the recall of newer memories

• The degree of forgetting is greater when the memories are similar

Retroactive interference

• Forgetting occurs when newer memories disrupt the recall of older memories already stored

• The degree of forgetting is greater when the memories are similar

Research on effects of similarity

• McGeoch and McDonald (1931) studied retroactive interference by changing the amount of similarity between two sets of materials. Participants had to learn a list of 10 words until they could remember them with 100% accuracy. They then learned a new list

• Group 1: synonyms, group 2: antonyms, group 3: words unrelated to the original ones, group 4: consonant syllables, group 5: three-digit numbers, group 6: no new list as they were a control condition

• When the participants were asked to recall the original list of words, the most similar material (synonyms) produced the worst recall

• This shows that interference is strongest when memories are similar

Evaluation- Strengths

• Real-world interference:

• Baddeley and Hitch (1977) asked rugby players to recall the names of the teams they had played against during a rugby season. The players who played the most games (most interference for memory) had the poorest recall

• This study shows that interference can operate in at least some real-world situations, increasing the validity of the theory

• Rugby is dangerous

Evaulation- Weaknesses

• Interference is temporary and can be overcome by using cues:

• Tulving and Psotka (1971) gave participants lists of words organised into categories, one list at a time. Recall averaged about 70% for the first list, but became progressively worse as participants learned each additional list (PI). At the end of the procedure the participants were given a cued recall test; they were told the names of the categories and recall rose again to about 70%

• This shows that interference causes a temporary loss of accessibility to material that is still in LTM, a finding not predicted by interference theory

Weakness

Validity issues - lab based research

Artificial materials-There is a greater chance that interference occurs in a lab than in real life situations due to the fact that the stimulus material used are normally a list of words.This is different to what people remember on a daily basis such as birthdays and recipes.This is a limitation because the use of artificial tasks makes interference more likely in the lab which means that interence isn’t applicable to forgetting in everyday life.

Time between learning-lab experiments are designed to maximise the possibility of interference.For practical reasons the time between learning and recalling the list of words is relatively short.The whole experience of learning  and recalling should be around an hour long.This means that the results don’t reflect the actual process of interference.